FCC Stance on Slicing Seen Creating More Questions than Certainty

Industry experts were still parsing the net neutrality rules Friday, looking at language about some hot-button issues such as 5G network slicing. On slicing, the draft doesn't reach conclusions about whether it should be exempt, noting carriers are just in the early stages of adopting slicing (see 2404040064). Slicing lets providers create multiple virtual networks on top of a shared network. How slicing should be treated has been hotly contested (see 2404010032).

“The FCC declined to do what either side wanted” on slicing, New Street’s Blair Levin said in a note to investors. “While this was not the clear, decisive win the wireless providers may have hoped for, we don’t believe this or a future FCC is likely to crack down on the primary uses of network slicing, which we understand to be network management techniques that better match wireless services to specific needs in ways that increase spectrum utilization.”

“The text left me rather confused more than reassured,” Digital Progress Institute President Joel Thayer said Friday. The commission seems interested in addressing slicing case by case, he said: “This does not bode well for consumer-facing uses of slicing as that tech starts to develop.”

The proposed order appears to avoid making clear decisions on slicing or how to deal with it, said Jonathan Cannon, R Street Institute policy counsel-technology and innovation and former aide to FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington. The draft said the FCC “will look at the technology as it happens and make a determination based on the existing framework they created,” Cannon said. One implication is the FCC will crack down on slicing if the agency sees it as a form of paid prioritization, he said.

"All the back-and-forth regarding the ... order's effect on network slicing underscores the uncertainty the common carrier regulatory regime is creating, yet once again,” emailed Cooley’s Robert McDowell, a former commissioner. “The practical reality is that today's questions may be answered by years of further rulemakings, enforcement actions and ensuing litigation.”

Free State Foundation President Randolph May emailed that the commission’s proposed regime is “based on as-yet-unknown emerging and evolving techno-functional constructs" and "the way the draft proposes to treat [slicing] is emblematic of why and how the proposal will suppress or delay other technological advancements, both wireless and wireline, to the detriment of consumers, the nation’s economy, and our national security.”

Others had a more positive view from the standpoint of industry. Cowen’s Paul Gallant told investors Friday the draft rules' stance on slicing was basically a win for the wireless industry.

“Nokia appreciates the FCC’s recognition of network slicing’s role in enabling innovative solutions for consumers and enterprises,” emailed Brian Hendricks, chief public policy and government affairs officer. “We appreciate the Commission has taken a cautious approach that does not predetermine that a new technology is a threat to open internet principles,” he said: “Network slicing will be an enormous benefit for consumers and will be done consistent with the draft rules.”

CTIA criticized the order in general but declined comment Friday about its approach on slicing. The order “will make it more difficult for the wireless industry to deliver competitive, ubiquitous, reliable wireless broadband that Americans rely on and that powers innovation and investment,” President Meredith Baker said.